To: IAHF List
Subject: Response to a Good Question: Clarification on CODEX - What is IS- What is NOT - Why the Confusion
Date: 20 Aug 2003 01:05:01 -0000
IAHF List: Bruce asks a very good question here which we all can learn from, please forward this to more people, especially in Australia, but also globally-
At 07:53 AM 8/19/03 -0400, Bruce wrote:
8. There has been NO legislation passed at this time in any country in the world to implement the CODEX Guideline as it is not complete.
[More spin, intended to put vitamin consumers in Australia asleep on this issue see everything above, below and read through it carefully.]
John, so is statement 8 true or false? I thought that CODEX had been implemented in Germany? Has it actually been implemented anywhere, or is it just being done under other pretense, and not being called CODEX?
Bruce- and everyone on the IAHF list:
Bad legislation which horribly impacts consumer access to supplements has been enacted in many countries including Greece, Norway, Germany, Australia and others, but its not called "Codex". Although its not formally CALLED Codex, Codex has almost become a household name associated with bad supplement legislation over the years even if it is not directly related to anything going on at the UN's Codex Alimentarius Commission which has not finalized a vitamin standard.
What people should realize is that Pharma coordinates the world's FDA's and the world's governments to push for global harmonization of supplement laws via a variety of mechanisms and there is a lot of coordination between our adversaries who are very heavily globally networked. We have seen officials from the TGA in Australia, and its Norwegian and South African counterparts, for example, show up in Ottawa Canada where they have moved things THERE in the wrong direction.
On June 18th Canada harmonized their dietary supplement regs to Australia's where the Pan recall resulted in 1600 products being removed from the shelves under false pretenses, without even a single product assay proving contamination. This bogus recall of Pan's dietary supplements, and the pulling of Pan's manufacturing license was done intentionally, calculated to generate a media circus against the dietary supplement industry.
Although so far we have stymied finalization of a Codex vitamin standard, with the passage of the EU Food Supplement Directive, we now face SERIOUS trouble at Codex.
The pharma dominated CHC (vitamin trade association in Australia) is sending out serious spin in the hopes that Australian consumers won't get wise to any of this.
The best thing Aussie vitamin consumers could possibly do is to join forces with their New Zealand counterparts to pressure Australia to harmonize their mindless, overly stringent, heavily pharmaceuticalized dietary supplement regulations to New Zealand's far more sensible, far more liberal, food based regulations.
Keep in mind that CHC in Australia is very much involved with trying to force New Zealand to harmonize its laws to Australia's because the huge vitamin companies in CHC want to dominate the New Zealand market, and they don't give a damn about consumers.
I realize this is a bit confusing, and I hope this clarifies things. Codex has become a very imprecise household name equated with Pharma Pricks trying to steal our supplements. I'm mighty glad it has saturated people's consciousness in that way, even if it does at times cause some people to make somewhat off the mark assessments of what is happening. On the whole, the Aussie health freedom fighters who CHC seeks to rebuff are quite correct in their concerns. CHC is attempting to do spin against their message in the hopes that they won't get wise to what is really going on right under their noses. I hope the Australian people will rise up against CHC, just like I hope the American people, and vitamin consumers world wide will rise up against CRN. There is no difference between the mindset of these two groups, both of which put profits very far ahead of people. CRN has many good companies within it that are being taken for a ride and should quit. They include a number of innovative companies and multilevel network marketing companies which appear blind to the fact that they're being led to the cliff. I am trying to catalyse an awareness amongst these companies in the hope that they will bail out in time and back the ANH lawsuit. http://www.iahf.com/anh_lawsuit.html also http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2003/2003_preprint_eu_01.html
If consumers, world wide, wish to safeguard their access to supplements, they MUST contribute to the ANH lawsuit via the ANH website
http://www.alliance-natural-health.org We CAN win this lawsuit, we have the best lawfirm in England to take the case, the lawyer who will handle it has made more than 70 appearances before the European Court of Justice and he has pioneered the procedure for overturning an EU Directive. This IS doable, but ONLY if enough people pitch in, because it won't be inexpensive.
This is for ALL the marbles.
Please forward this widely.
Take it to your local health food store and have the owner and managers call me.
The Joint International Committee of NNFA and AHPA voted UNANIMOUSLY to back the ANH lawsuit, but NNFA members have not heard about this because NNFA's Legislative Director, Kim Smith, has wrongly ignored the unanimous decision and has not sought to alert anyone. I feel that this problem is the result of conflicts of interest inside NNFA stemming from the trade associations unwillingness to enforce either their Conflict of Interest Disclosure bylaw, or their Code of Ethics. I am hoping the good people of NNFA can do something to address this very serious problem and I urge NNFA to fire their current attorney, Mark Ullman, and also to fire Kim Smith. I urge them to expel Randy Dennin of Pfizer and any other pharma interests that they've currently unwisely allowed to be members.
International Advocates for Health Freedom
POB 10632 Blacksburg VA 24062 USA